there is no replacement driver, or when people have to jam into a bus or accí7 light rail vehic. muni recently was approved for performance initiative. this funding is required to be increase ridership. there is no more effective way to achieve these goals than to have a system that's in good shape, that's reliable and on which people believe they can depend. this funding should be dedicated 100% to improving muni's deteriorating reliant bywpi'm maintaining and purchasing muni vehicles and improving muni's operation. the resolution before us today so provides. mta board of direction is considering a proposal to use a portion of this regional funding not for improving muni's reliability but rather to fund free muni passes for youth, free as opposed to the 70% discount muni already provides.

i've been public in my skepticism of the free muni for youth program. my skepticism has been based on and my belief the program would come from muni's operating money. we're now seeing that's the case that muni is considering using some of this maintenance program rather than to invest that money in the system to purchase more vehicles, to rehabilitate vehicles and otherwise make the system more reliable. once the free muni pilot program ends there will be enormous pressure to extend the program and that pressure almost certainly will include using more funding that could be used to improve muni's reliability. reasonable minds can differ on whether you should ride muni for free. i respect the views of the supporters of this program, my free youth fares is different than the operational funding to

pay for the program. the most important thing we can do for all san franciscans, and particularly for those who are dependent on muni for their transportation needs, is to provide a reliable system. so, colleagues, i respectfully ask for your support on thisb+(; resolution. >> president chiu: supervisor campos. >> supervisor campos: thank you very much, mr. president. seems that in the last few months, supervisor wiener and i '( s&tj show on the road. we've had this exchange at different times, not only in these chambers but also beforehm the metropolitan transportation commission. and i#?( mx certainly respect supervisor wiener and his position, and i think that he was correctonnny in saying thate are -- you know that reasonable minds can disagree with this specific matter. but let's just step back a little bit and talk about sort of what we're talking about here.

the issue of the free muni for youth pilot project has been somethingyd( :r+rpá this board s been dealing with for more than a year. and at different times, his different actions have been taken by[(%( cnç city agencies , including a resolution that was supported by seven members of this board, urging the san francisco mta to begin a free muni for all youth program, pilot program here in san francisco. the matter went to the mta board the proposal so that it views of some of the people who had voted against the original proposal, and limited the scope to allow for free muni for low income youth. and some of the people that had objected to the original proposal, my understanding, had indicated that they would support something that wasn't for all youth but for low income

youth. the caveat that the mta board of director provided in the resolution they passed was that it was predicated on the pilot actually receiving funding from the region. so that it wasn't just muni funding the pilot, but that in fact the region could support it. we went to the mtc and there were actually two votes taken. because it allocated money from a specific source. and then at the request of one of the individuals who actually voted against the funding of the pilot, there was a new funding source that was found by the mtc staff. that's what's before you today. the resolution that the mta board of directors passed approving a free muni for low income youth did not specify what funding source the money came from. it left that question open. but in terms of the funding that

we're talking about, we have to make clear that the mtc provided in the approval for the use for this very type of pilot, that in fact it was found the funding at the request of someone in fact commissioner tiny of marin, so that this kind of a pilot that we're talking about could be funded with this money. so the idea that was put out there, that somehow this is not what this funding was intended for, respectfully is not happened at the mtc. but the main point that i want to make is this. you know, i don't know that anyone herei0÷s=úñ questions the importance of investing in the maintenance of muni, and improving the reliability of the system, and making sure that we have a system that works for every rider.

but the notion that we have to choose between that and actually making public transit affordable to low income kids, to me, is a false choice. the two are not mutually exclusive. in fact, as mr. reiskin himself noted during the hearing, and as was noted during the presentation of the tpi funding, the money that has been allocated for san francisco, it's money that can be used for different things. and the fact that the mta board of directors chooses to use this increase the accessibility of public transportation for low income youth does not mean that the mta cannot, at the same time, turn around and use some of the money for maintenance. that somehow the lack of reliability of the system of an agency that has anpvpx& $800 min budget rests solely on the fact

that it's going to make public transit more accessible to low income kids, it's simply not reflective of the reality that has been true of muni for the last few years. muni, to the extent that their issues about maintenance, the reason for that is not because of the funding of these types,%f programs. to the extent thatmine is failing or hasjpn,1 to address those issues, it is not because of somehowqpihb making public transportation more accessible to poor kids in this city. i think it's simply unfair to place that responsibility on that group. we all have ajr:ñ responsibilito make sure that we have a reliable system, and the working families and the poor families of this city are as interested in increasing the reliability as any. but to simply say that we have to choose one or the other, to

me, is not accurate. it is not a choice that has to be made. it is not how san francisco should operate its public transit system. we can have an accessible system that is reliable. the two are not at adds -- odds with one another. so, colleagues, i have circulated through the clerk a set of amendments that provides language that reflects the position that indeed you can maintain the system, and still provide accessibility to low income families, and kids in the city. and so i hereby make a motion to amend the resolution presented by supervisor wiener along the lines outlined in the amendment that has been distributed. so moved. >> second. >> president chiu: supervisor campos has made a motion as described seconded by supervisor olague. on the motion to amend, supervisor avalos.

>> supervisor avalos: thank you, president chiu. i will be supporting this amendment. it makes much sense because i was very concerned that the original resolution overturned probably a year's work, i think longer than a year's work, of the, you know, hundreds of young people who worked, organized across san francisco, to get a policy of free muni for youth, at least for low income youth. i believe that at one point i remember the author of this resolution had discussed well why don't we make it for low income youth and we can support free muni for low income youth and now we have a resolution that pretty much says this should only be used for maintenance. so i'm really happy to support amendments that include, you know, prioritizing free muni for low income youth and maintenance. needed to actually help bring up

the next generation of muni users. i know we talk about effectiveness all the time, and i think that there could be no other effective way of making sure that young people are going to be riding muni and riding muni without any stigma attached about whether they have a pass or not because they will be able to ride without -- ride for free. so we know that will effectively help many youth choose to get on muni and do it with legal means. i know what was always -- and we raised the muni pass up to 22 million, that effectively made it difficult for a lot of young people to be able to afford on our muni buses. we saw that there were about 40% fewer passes that were issued to young people after the increase. that's something to give great pause about whether this is the right policy moving forward. so i'm happy to support this amendment, and i actually want to really congratulate the young people, organizations like power, and coleman advocates for

youth, youth commission, youth students from public schools and private schools, who were all on board for this, you know, free muni for youth program. it would be great to see it pass. and we can actually have a great example for other cities in the bay area to follow. i know there's a lot of interest in the bay area as well seeing that happen. >> president chiu: supervisorú/] elsbernd. >> supervisor elsbernd: thank you, mr. president. through the president, supervisor campos, i struggle today to follow your logic. i have a real difficult time. just 20 minutes ago we heard you present the choice that the police department was going to have to face was violence in the mission or enforce public nudity. that's not a false choice? i mean that's one of the most bogus choices i've heard. i didn't say anything because i think everyone here knows hour police department knows how to prioritize. that wasn't a budgetary issue.

that's not a false choice but this is. i hope everyone here understands a budget has to be equal. revenues must equal expenditures. you are in a box. there is not a concept that it's an unlimited budget. if it wass/jpmc an unlimited bui would agree with you. it would be a false choice. we only have so much money. that requires us to make choices. that's what a budget document is. we have heard over and over again, a budget documentbfpf,ñ a testament to what our priorities are. there's no false adjective necessary. we are choosing. i agree, this is a worthy program. i do. i commend you for pursuing it. the problem i see in it is we have to make a choice, a real one, what are our priorities. and for me, priority's making making sure our buses are clean, making sur1jpmr(ú9q that youtd to take the bus to school

actually have a bus that's on time and clean and can get there. these dollars, you're right, mtc said could be used for this program but mtc also said it could be used for anything. and when i make the budget choice, i want to prioritize safe buses. i want to prioritize buses that are going to operate. and to muni, i said this in the hearing, not surprisingly director reiskin is not here today. this is a $1.6 million project. can anybody identify for me the funding that's going to help fund it for the remaining seven months? director reiskin couldn't. it was unidentified. i mean respectfully, supervisor campos, i've heard you beat the crap out of departments for4n( ñ putting forward programs with unallocated dollars. this is an unallocated project, $1.6 million is only for the first five months. he's hoping that we get money in

2013-14. the inconsistency here is mind-boggling. i understand this is your passion. i understand you want to deliver it. but we were told over and over again no moneys that could be used in our general operating budget would fund this program. that is exactly the opposite of what is happening here. the dollars here could be used for general operating. and we are choosing not to fund our general operating purposes. we're choosing to fund a program for five months, and then hoping the next seven months money appears. i just find it completely irresponsible. and frankly, very disappointed. i won't say with colleagues who support it here. i appreciate the passion, i appreciate the politics of it. absolutely disappointed with the mta. their stewardship and leadership of this program is a failure and i think if they go forward to the electorate saying we want to raise parking meters, we want to raise more taxes and this program is on the books, good

luck. >> president chiu: supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: thank you, mr. president. i( ]9 want to be clear about something first. in terms of the mtc and supervisor campos is correct, that i'm not in any way suggesting that it is somehow prohibited or inappropriate legally to use this money for the free youth pass program. this is one of the allowed uses. but as supervisor elsbernd stawtd stated so is maintenance procurement or rehabs and this is a choice, not a false choice. we heard that yesterday. we heard it today. that is absolutely rhetoric.82( and -- well i don't like it, but the fact is that transit funding is a limited thing. it's not this growing asset. you don't just use the money for something, and then it magically appears from somewhere else.

it is a -- for -- i don't like it but it's a zero sum game in terms of how we use very scarce transit dollars. this is anything but a false choice. i will also say that i recall, months and months ago, hearing both the mayor and mr. reiskin state that no further operating money will be used for this program, period. those were categorical statements. so when we went to the mtc and mtc was proposing to use a form of lifeline money to give to san francisco, iñi( x.÷ think $4 million for this program, that money can't be used just for general maintenance. it is lifeline money. and i voted for that at the mtc. and i voted for it despite my concerns about the programs because a, i was representing san francisco which is on record supporting the program, but also, because this was not operating money. this was lifeline money. so i supported it there. this is different. this is money that can be used

improvements. and instead, we're using it for what is a program that i will acknowledge has benefits. i'm not in any way trashing this program. i think there are benefits to it. but it is not going to improve our system. and instead, i think what will happen is once this pilot ends, there is no way that the pilot won't be renewed or made permanent. and as i mentioned yesterday in committee, we will hear from seniors and disabled people well if you're going to give it to the youth why not seniors and disabled who are equally deserving. and we will see a renewed and permanent and perhaps even larger program with very laudable goals that will take more and more muni maintenance and operating eligible money to fundg:z)t it. and all the while that $420 million in deferred maintenance will remain.

supervisor elsbernd is correct, that this sends a signal to the voters about mta's allocation of voters about mta's allocation of resources andp the program. i totally respect that. but for the ridersj/ le of this system who are sick and tired of stuffing into cars because there aren't enough of those vehicles, and are sick and tired of waiting 20, 30 minutes for a vehicle to come, because there aren't enough vehicles or it break down again because we didn't put the money into doing a mid-life overhaul, this absolutely undermines confidence, especially as we're preparing to go to the voters for more money for muni. so in terms of the amendments, this is i guess what you might call i guess opposite day. if you go into someone's legislation and say i'm going to do an amendment that does the reverse of your legislation, it's one thing to vote against this resolution, which i

understand the politics of this, and i understand why some of my colleagues may vote against this, but it's another thing to do an amendment that makes it say the opposite of what the resolution says. the point of this resolution was to say that this money is maintenance eligible and should be used to improve the system and it's reliability and to do an amendment that completely turns it over and says that the money should be used for something else, while this is a totally valid opinion to have i question whya= 4 that would be t as an amendment and to -- colleagues i urge you to reject the amendment and vote up or down on the actual resolution. >> president chiu: supervisor campos. >> supervisor campos: thank you, mr. president. i'm not going to repeat a lot of the arguments and i respect what supervisor elsbernd, what supervisor wiener are saying. i'm not going to get into the labeling of what each side is doing, whether it's completely irresponsible or responsible, whatever you want to call it, i think there are different perspectives on this. what i will say(#( áb is that t

know that any one side here has a monopoly on caring for the maintenance and the reliability of the system. i think all of us believe that that's a priority, and that's something that we should do. but the reason why the amendments are made, supervisor wiener, simply because there are those of us who believe as a principle, that in reality in fact being for making the system accessible touocu income youth is not exclusive -- mutually exclusive from trying to maintain the system. and that i think goes to the very heart of this point that to the extent that you have issues with what muni is doing or not doing with some things, that predicating the resolution of those issues solely or primarily on whether or not to put this that's the right way to frame

this. the last thing that i would say is, as you correctly noted, the board of supervisors has acted before on this. i don't know that there has been any new information or evidence that's been presented here about the pros and cons of this system. the fact is that the folks who have raised concerns about the free muni for youth for low income youth pilot have consistently been against that. and i respect that. but there is nothing new that they're saying in terms, respectjjp%9 terms of their opposition. so the amendments that are before you reflect the fact that this board of supervisors has been on record before, and we believe should be on record again, asking that we commit to making this pilot a reality on the premise that working on this

pilot that makes muni accessible does not preclude maintaining the system and if so it is in that spirit that this amendment is offered and i hope that my colleagues support the amendments. thank you. >> president chiu: colleagues, unless there's additional discussion let's take a roll call vote on supervisor campos' motion to amend. madam clerk. >> clerk calvillo: supervisor avalos, aye. supervisor campos, aye. president chiu, aye. supervisor chu, no. supervisor cohen, aye. supervisor elsbernd, no. supervisor farrell, no. supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor olague, aye. supervisor wiener, no. there are seven ayes and four nos. >> president chiu: the motion passes. supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: eye will be -- since this is no longer the resolution that i actually authored and said the opposite

of the resolution that i authored, i will be voting against thisv #çt resolution. >> president chiu: roll call vote on the underlying resolution as amended. >> clerk calvillo: on item 38 as amended, supervisor avalos, aye. supervisor campos, aye. president chiu, aye. supervisor chu, no. supervisor cohen, aye. supervisor elsbernd, no. supervisor farrell, no. supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor olague, aye. supervisor wiener, no. there are seven ayes and four nos. >> president chiu: the resolution is adopted as amended. colleagues, we already adopted item 39. why don't we now go to item 40. >> clerk calvillo: item 40 was considered by the land use and economic development committee at a regular meeting on november 291 -- 19 forwarded to the board

to sus £yellow pages pilot program. >> president chiu: supervisor elsbernd. >> supervisor elsbernd: could i please be added as a cosponsor to this item. >> president chiu: supervisor elsbernd i appreciate the cosponsorship. roll call vote. >> clerk calvillo: on item 40, supervisor avalos, aye. supervisor campos, aye. president chiu,qñp!ss aye. supervisor chu,j- bñ aye. supervisor cohen, aye. supervisor9 0p&s elsbernd, aye. supervisor farrell, aye. supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor olague, absent. supervisor wiener, aye. there are 10 ayes. >> president chiu: the ordinance is passed on first reading. supervisor olague, did she just step out?

>> the clerk: she is not on the floor, mr. president. >> president chiu: at this time, why don't we go to roll call. >> clerk calvillo: supervisor avalos, you're first on roll call for introductions. >> supervisor avalos: thank you. a couple of items, i have imperative item that is mostly commendatory. declaring november 25, 2012, international day for the elimination of violence against women and girls. this is a resolution that we do year after year. last year i done it, and had honored one of the sponsors of the resolution, who does work in the community around violence prevention. she was having an event this november 24, this coming saturday at dance mission. called the -- that will be at 7:00 and it will be a cultural event, celebrating the day of international day for the elimination of violence against women and girls.

so we have that item proclamation for that day for the imperative calendar. my other item is an in memorium for alex exclamaddo who passed away at the age of 83 years old. he has important history here in san francisco. he was the founder and former publisher editor of the san francisco" nx based philippe news. he and the philippine news have played a major role in the growing visibility and activism an outspoken critic of the late president marcos and despite bribes from the administration he continued to fiercely expose the human rights violations of the dictator. seven kids in the sunset and

produced the philippine news from their headquarters south of market to become the most read filipino newspaper in the united states with circulation of 120,000. he's founding chairperson of national federation of philippine american association, been a voice for immigrants rights, farm workers struggle and -- equity for over five decades. last month he received a lifetime achievement award from the filipino-american press club. he is survived by his wife and seven kids. >> clerk calvillo: thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor mar. >> supervisor mar: thank you. i first wanted to ask if we could -- meeting in memorium for fay bingham. she passed away november 2, 2012 at the age of 91. she was born in harrison, southh

dakota. she moved to san francisco and resided in richmond for at least -- for the last 56 years. she was a long time member of local 2, the hotel and restaurant workers union and worked at the fairmont hotel, and also at the st. francis hotel and ended her career at the bakery. she is preceded in death by her husband who served three years in the coast guard and 30 in the navy. fay will be missed by her two sisters in michigan plus many her neez live niece lives in -- memorial services were held on november 17. ms. bingham will be greatly missed. thank you to debby, from human services network for alerting us

to the passing of ms. bingham. also i have a couple of other wanted to say that coming up on the imperative agenda is a resolution in support of small business saturday which is the saturday two days after thanksgiving. and the resolution -- the imperative agenda resolution declares november 24, 2012 the citizen after thanksgiving holiday as small business holiday to celebrate increasing awareness of locally owned small business in san francisco. small businesses have less than 100 employees represent 98% of employ approximately 50% of employees in the private sector. small businesses also contribute to 52% of the total sales of taxes paid by businesses in the city. it's also important to note for every $100 spent locally owned independent